Improving alternative livelihood interventions in marine protected areas: A case study in Tanzania |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Ethiopian Environment and Forest Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia;2. ChildFund Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia;1. National Center for Scientific Research, PSL Research University, CRIOBE, USR 3278 CNRS-EPHE-UPVD, 66860 Perpignan, France;2. Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Pisa, Via Derna 1, 56126 Pisa, Italy;3. Department of Biology, University of Malta, Msida MSD2080, Malta;4. Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technologies, University of Salento, CoNISMa, 73100 Lecce, Italy;5. CoNISMa (Interuniversity National Consortium of Marine Sciences), 00196 Rome, Italy;6. Centre d''Estudis Avançats de Blanes, CEAB-CSIC, C. acces Cala S. Francesc 14, 17300 Blanes, Spain;7. Department for the Earth, Environment and Life Sciences, University of Genoa, CoNISMa, 16132 Genoa, Italy;8. Instituto Español de Oceanografía - Centro Oceanográfico de Baleares, Muelle de Poniente s/n, 07015 Palma de Mallorca, Spain;9. UMR 9190 MARBEC, IRD-CNRS-IFREMER-UM, Université de Montpellier, 34095 Montpellier, France;10. Section Paleontology, Institute of Geological Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin, 12249 Berlin, Germany;11. Departament de Biologia Evolutiva, Ecologia i Ciències Ambientals, Universitat de Barcelona, 08028 Barcelona, Spain;12. Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, 46.7 km. Athens Sounio, PO Box 712, 19013 Anavyssos, Attiki, Greece;13. Department of Ecology, Agronomy and Aquaculture, University of Zadar, Trg kneza Vi?eslava 9, 23000 Zadar, Croatia;14. Institute of Marine Biology, University of Montenegro, Dobrota b.b., 85330 Kotor, Montenegro;15. Université Côte d''Azur, CNRS, ECOMERS, Parc Valrose 28, 06108 Nice Cedex, France;p. Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, LOV, 06230 Villefranche-sur-mer, France;q. Administrative Department for Sustainable Development, Region of Istria, Flanati?ka 29, 52100 Pula, Croatia;r. Institut scientifique de Rabat, Avenue Ibn Batouta, Rabat, Morocco;s. Department of Life Sciences, University of Trieste, CoNISMa, 34127 Trieste, Italy;t. Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, 80121 Napoli, Italy;u. Microbia Environnement, Observatoire Océanologique, F-66651 Banyuls/Mer, France;v. National Center for Scientific Research, PSL Université Paris, CRIOBE, USR 3278 CNRS-EPHE-UPVD, Maison des Océans, 195 rue Saint-Jacques 75505 Paris, France |
| |
| Abstract: | Alternative livelihood programmes are often used in multipleuse marine protected areas as incentives, compensation for lost opportunities, or as intervention strategies for poverty alleviation. Yet little is known about their impacts on biodiversity conservation and the well-being of the targeted communities. This study focuses primarily on alternative livelihood projects undertaken among selected groups of individuals, in six villages, located in the Mnazi Bay-Ruvuma Estuary Marine Park (MBREMP), Mtwara district, southern Tanzania. The aim was to investigate how the processes involved in the implementation of these new livelihood activities contributed to the expected outcomes of providing good returns to reduce community's dependency on the sea and improve conservation. Data were collected through focus group discussions with selected members of local community, who actively took part in the projects; key informant interviews with conservation personnel and district fisheries officials; questionnaire surveys of a random sample of project beneficiary households; and a review of pertinent documents. The overwhelming majority of survey respondents (90%) reported that the projects were allocated inappropriately. Interviews and focus groups further revealed that the purpose of alternative projects was not sufficiently clear and that many beneficiaries perceived that these projects were initiated simply to comply with the MBREMP regulations. Overall, 70% of survey respondents stated that the project activities could not compete with the income gained from fisheries. An analysis of documents further revealed that almost all projects began to flounder when funding from the MBREMP came to an end. This was because they were not supported beyond the pilot phase and, thereafter, insufficient revenue was generated to maintain running costs. Improved targeting and design of livelihood interventions will ensure that the projects achieve the goals of providing alternatives for fishers, increasing well-being and improving biodiversity conservation. |
| |
| Keywords: | Alternative livelihoods Marine protected areas Fisheries dependency Beneficiaries Tanzania |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
